Dismissed

India Centre for Human Rights and Law. and 2 Ors. v. Union of India and 3 Ors.

Bombay HC10 Jan 2020PIL/27/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court acknowledged the rights of persons with disabilities to access local trains but declined to issue binding directions due to operational constraints during peak hours. The Court directed Railways to voluntarily explore initiatives to assist boarding at termini and activate help desks before dismissing the PILs.

What did the court decide?

Directed Railways to voluntarily explore arrangements for assisting persons with disabilities boarding trains at specific stations; dismissed the PILs.

India Centre for Human Rights and Law. and 2… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2020)

¶1

V.S. Sherla

¶2

pil.27.2007 N PIL.6.2014_920n920.1.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J.

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.27 OF 2007

¶5

India Centre for Human Rights and Law & … Petitioners Others

¶6

Vs The Union of India, through … Respondents The Ministry of Railways, New Delhi & Others

¶7

WITH

¶8

SUO MOTO PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.6 OF 2014

¶9

HIGH COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION … Petitioner

¶10

Vs Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Railways & … Respondents Others

¶11

Ms.Meenaz Kakalia i/b Mr.Mihir Desai, Senior Advocate for the Petitioners in PIL/27/2007

¶12

Mr.L.T. Satelkar, AGP, for Respondent – State in PIL/6/2014

¶13

Mr.Suresh Kumar with Ms.Priyanka Tiwari for Respondent Nos.1, 2, 3 in PIL/27/2007 and for Respondent Nos.1 to 6 in PIL/6/2014

¶14

Mr.R.J. Mane i/b Mr.B.B. Sharma for Respondent No.4 in PIL/27/2007

¶15

Mr.D.I. Waghmare,. Law Officer, Western Railway, Mumbai – present

¶16

Mr.Abhay Sanap, Divisional Commercial Manager, Mumbai – present

¶17

Page 1 of 7

¶18

pil.27.2007 N PIL.6.2014_920n920.1.doc

¶19

CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & R.I. CHAGLA, JJ.

¶20

DATED: JANUARY 10, 2020

¶21

¶22

These Public Interest Litigations have been pending for a long time and the concern of the Court was that, persons with disabilities and covered by the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

¶23

Act, 2016 and its predecessor law, should have a safe and comfortable journey or, at least, get an opportunity to board the local trains.

¶24

It is not possible for this Court to evolve any mechanism muchless issue any binding directions to the railways so as to make a provision, as desired by the PIL petitioners. While the PIL petitioners would rely upon the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules, 2017 and the Rules falling under Chapter VI thereof, titled as “Accessibility”, the typical journey that one has to undertake in the morning and evening peak hours by local trains, the huge number of passengers and the increasing passenger load that is to be catered by the railways, it will not be possible for this Court to direct making provisions consistent with the Rules and the object

¶25

Page 2 of 7

¶26

pil.27.2007 N PIL.6.2014_920n920.1.doc

¶27

and purpose of the enactment, but surely after this enactment has been brought into effect, the Court will be expecting, from the railways, an initiative to assist the persons with disabilities and particularly in upholding their rights.

¶28

It has been clarified by this law and particularly in the definition of the term ‘rehabilitation’, as defined under section 2(za), that the same is a process aimed at enabling persons with disabilities to attain and maintain optimal, physical, sensory, intellectual, psychological, environmental or social function levels. A person with disabilities is defined to mean a person with long term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairment which, in interaction with barriers, hinders his full and effective participation in society equally with others.

¶29

There are persons with disabilities having high support needs separately defined and dealt with. Equally, there is a definition of the term, ‘transport system’, which includes rail transport and the aim is last mile connectivity. Presently, we are concerned with persons with physical disability. It may be long term or otherwise but the petitions have been moved primarily with their interest in mind.

¶30

Page 3 of 7

¶31

pil.27.2007 N PIL.6.2014_920n920.1.doc

¶32

As far as such persons are concerned, we do not think that

¶33

any directions, which are sought by the PIL petitioners can be issued, for that may amount to interfering with the effective, smooth and expeditious movement of local trains especially during peak hours. However, the railways can surely explore the possibility of encouraging the persons with disabilities to undertake journey by local trains from the Terminus till its final destination, say, for example, from Churchgate/Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Terminus to Borivali / Virar / Thane / Kalyan / Ambernath. If they have to undertake a long journey by local train from destination to destination, the assistance that is required for them to board the local train, when it is stationary, is also expected and presently the railways have not explored that possibility fully. We would expect the railways to explore that possibility by making suitable arrangements. It has been stated that local trains have to complete the stated and pre-decided journey from destination to destination so that the huge load of passengers from the distant suburbs to the Mumbai city for work can reach Mumbai South or Southern Mumbai in time. Similarly, in the evenings after office hours, these trains have to carry passengers to the stations near to

¶34

Page 4 of 7

¶35

pil.27.2007 N PIL.6.2014_920n920.1.doc

¶36

their homes. On such occasions, the load may be too heavy but surely from destination to destination arrangements can be made so that the persons with disabilities can board these trains and get off from the same. Mr.Suresh Kumar says that the railways will explore the possibility of placing alarms or other suitable measures so that whatever assistance such passengers require, can be provided. Even the help desk at the main stations can be activated so that the basic facilities and amenities for such passengers are in place, including the assistance. To our mind, even if a beginning is made, then, the persons with disabilities and particularly awaiting rehabilitation in the true sense of the term would be assisted.

¶37

We impressed upon Mr.Suresh Kumar and through him, the railway officials, who are present in the Court, that initially nobody had ever thought that disabled persons and particularly, people with physical disabilities, would be able to board an aircraft without any hurdle or obstacle. Today, that is more or less achieved by provision of basic and advanced amenities and facilities at the airport. If that requires a huge investment or participation from others including private agencies, then, even that was explored by

¶38

Page 5 of 7

¶39

pil.27.2007 N PIL.6.2014_920n920.1.doc

¶40

the Department of Civil Aviation and the Airport operators. The railways will have to make, if not anything, a small beginning so that we can see more facilities provided for persons with disabilities apart from a very small bogie or a portion of a large compartment with independent access. It may be that these compartments are full to their capacity but that does not mean that they cater to all the disabled persons or persons with physical disabilities. It is only when the railways take the initiative that these persons will muster the necessary courage, strength and gain confidence to board a train and undertake the journey comfortably to their place of work.

¶41

We do not think that issuing directions over and above those already issued would carry the case any further. We are anxious to go beyond making provision of a bogie or a compartment in a train. We are looking at such facilities which would enable persons with disabilities to board these bogies or compartments and that they can also undertake, on occasions, a long journey. It is in that endeavour that we expect the railways to take the necessary steps and measures and we are happy to note that Mr.Suresh Kumar says that the railways are not averse to exploring the above.

¶42

Page 6 of 7

¶43

pil.27.2007 N PIL.6.2014_920n920.1.doc

¶44

In these circumstances, keeping these PILs pending would serve no purpose. In addition to what has been already directed and suggested, we do not think that we can go any further. In the circumstances, the PILs and all connected applications are disposed off.

¶45

(R.I. CHAGLA, J.)

¶46

(S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

¶47

Digitally signed by Vishwanath Vishwanath S. Sherla S. Sherla Date: 2020.01.15 11:13:06 +0530

¶48

Page 7 of 7

India Centre for Human Rights and Law. and 2 Ors. v. Union of India and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

India Centre for Human Rights and Law. and 2 Ors. v. Union of India and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Association for Aiding Justice Vs Union of India and Ots.

Paladin Paints and Chemicals Private Limited Vs Union of India and 7 Ors.

Save Mangroves and Navi Mumbai Existence (Samne), through President, Mr. Sukumar Killedar Vs Union of India and Anr.

Save Mangroves and Nvai Mumbai Existence (Samne), through President Vs the Secretary, Govt. of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests and Ors.

Shramik Mukti Sanghatana Vs M/S F.A. Enterprises Tps and Ors.

Sachin Bhimrao Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Nanasaheb Babasaheb Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

New Link Road Residents Forum Vs Krishnadevi Malchand Kamathia and 15 Ors.

Shanta Gorakh Suryavanshi and 19 Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtr through the Government Pleader and 5 Ors.

Ishwarkatti Shivpad Hanmant Vs the Deputy Director of Education, Pune Region, Pune and Ors.

Ishwarkatti Shivpad Hanmant Vs the Deputy Director of Education, Pune Region, Pune and Ors.

High Court on Its Own Motion Vs Union of India and 6 Ors.

Nayara Energy Limited Vs Bank of Baroda and Anr.

Nizar Mawani and Anr. Vs Union of India and Anr.